The Most Prophetic warning of our time?
- Thread starter Joseph C.
- Start date
fizzit
10 kW
the noose in my closet beckons...
self elimination would probably be the single best thing i could do for the environment, too! :|
self elimination would probably be the single best thing i could do for the environment, too! :|
StudEbiker
100 kW
"The most prophetic warning of our time??" I'm sure some dunderhead wrote a similar piece regarding Chicken Little's prognostication as well. 
dogman dan
1 PW
Hang yourself? Why? Much more effective if each of us goes out and kills a few hundered others.
The author forgets that unlike helpless animal species, humans will build what it takes to survive, and adapt faster than anything but cockroaches that did it millions of years ago. So later on, nothing left but humans that live on algea and cockroaches. Yummy, but homo sapiens is not going anywhere. Soylent green anyone?
The author forgets that unlike helpless animal species, humans will build what it takes to survive, and adapt faster than anything but cockroaches that did it millions of years ago. So later on, nothing left but humans that live on algea and cockroaches. Yummy, but homo sapiens is not going anywhere. Soylent green anyone?
Philistine
100 kW
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,736
Nope,
Amberwolf gave us the most prophetic warning of our time - don't weld or fry up bacon without your shirt on
http://www.endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=28631
Amberwolf gave us the most prophetic warning of our time - don't weld or fry up bacon without your shirt on
http://www.endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=28631
wineboyrider
1 MW
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/24/lord-monckton-wins-global-warming-debate-at-oxford-union/
1st fail is that Global warming is real. 2nd fail is the rope I have laying around my house is too small to hang my fat ass. 8) 8)
1st fail is that Global warming is real. 2nd fail is the rope I have laying around my house is too small to hang my fat ass. 8) 8)
Saving the planet for the sake of…the planet? If you start with the premise that we should manage the planet as a resource for our benefit, I'm on board. But people who value the planet more than the humans should walk the talk and make themselves fertilizer.
gogo said:Saving the planet for the sake of…the planet? If you start with the premise that we should manage the planet as a resource for our benefit, I'm on board. But people who value the planet more than the humans should walk the talk and make themselves fertilizer.
If you think about it that way, that diffuses the tree hugging side of it all which is nice as that's a turnoff to most.
But if you think of it as resource management, then it still fails to make sense to continue to trash your resource, so you'll come to the same conclusions about environmental conservation.
neptronix said:gogo said:Saving the planet for the sake of…the planet? If you start with the premise that we should manage the planet as a resource for our benefit, I'm on board. But people who value the planet more than the humans should walk the talk and make themselves fertilizer.
If you think about it that way, that diffuses the tree hugging side of it all which is nice as that's a turnoff to most.
But if you think of it as resource management, then it still fails to make sense to continue to trash your resource, so you'll come to the same conclusions about environmental conservation.
No, there's an important and fundamental distiction to be made here. Many people hold the world view that Man is evil and deserves to suffer for it (see original sin as an example). Don't ask me why this is, I don't understand it, its just an observation of the root of many philosophies. When your standard of value is based on something other than human life, different choices result. If hugging trees is pro human, let the hugging ensue.
Philistine
100 kW
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,736
Really wise words and observation...
I quoted it on another thread once, but PJ O'Rourke once said "Fretting about humans and the environment is like fretting about what to do with the kids and the carpet.... it depends on the kids, and it depends on the carpet..." I think the point gogo is making, is that it is one thing to manage the carpet like a resource, but if your starting point is that the carpet should never even see a human shoe or experience a single mark, what's the point of the carpet?
If you think about it, less humans and/or less waste generated by humans is pro-human, with the animal world being a side-benefit. We have harnessed the species below us via farming and such, but we really are dependent on everything below us.
The most wacko of all liberal hippies and the resource management train of thought are both looking for the same goal - let's extend the viability of our species on this chunk of rock as long as possible and get away from the air, water, and land pollution that's making life harder for everything here.
Less people is always a good thing. You can yammer on about cutting your carbon emissions forever and etc. but the real positive effect is to just not have as many kids ( or any at all ). I have a big problem with the world's religions that command people to produce as many children as possible.. great way to increase your fellowship, lol.. but when those texts were written, nobody was thinking that population would grow this high. Used to be that half of your kids would die before 20. These are certainly different times.
The most wacko of all liberal hippies and the resource management train of thought are both looking for the same goal - let's extend the viability of our species on this chunk of rock as long as possible and get away from the air, water, and land pollution that's making life harder for everything here.
Less people is always a good thing. You can yammer on about cutting your carbon emissions forever and etc. but the real positive effect is to just not have as many kids ( or any at all ). I have a big problem with the world's religions that command people to produce as many children as possible.. great way to increase your fellowship, lol.. but when those texts were written, nobody was thinking that population would grow this high. Used to be that half of your kids would die before 20. These are certainly different times.
spinningmagnets
100 TW
A study of the Kwakiutl tribe may prove to be useful to this discussion. They make huts out of their most abundant resource...snow. They make kayaks out of seal-skins, and they eat jerkey made from seal and caribou.
Also, at the other end of the same scale is the Tuareg peoples of the Sahara desert. Although they "seem" to be doing fine without air-conditioning and a big-screen TV with remote control, I'm not at all certain that their lifestyle could be described as "living", with its glaring lack of beer and pizza.
So..whether the Earth gets hotter or colder, the humans seem to stubbornly find some way to have a few members of their race continue to exist.
Also, at the other end of the same scale is the Tuareg peoples of the Sahara desert. Although they "seem" to be doing fine without air-conditioning and a big-screen TV with remote control, I'm not at all certain that their lifestyle could be described as "living", with its glaring lack of beer and pizza.
So..whether the Earth gets hotter or colder, the humans seem to stubbornly find some way to have a few members of their race continue to exist.
fizzit
10 kW
neptronix said:
It's true... I guess I could go on... at least until my ebike breaks down again
Philistine
100 kW
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,736
After your ebike breaks down again (before you kill yourself) please try hookers and blow (if you have ever tried it, you wouldn't kill yourself, you'd just get a better job)
I know you're gonna get some flak on that post Joseph, but let me say... right on!
I've heard of these eternity-lasting lightbulbs.. some which have lasted over 100 years and counting. My dad mentioned that the original bulbs were like that, but it's good for business to not sell them, so good luck finding one.
I've heard of these eternity-lasting lightbulbs.. some which have lasted over 100 years and counting. My dad mentioned that the original bulbs were like that, but it's good for business to not sell them, so good luck finding one.
fizzit
10 kW
Philistine said:
Blow and hoes! Got it! I could use a better job.
I agree about the whole afforrestation thing. We should pay for it by charging large taxes on hydrocarbon fuels.
mrzed
100 W
spinningmagnets said:
Not to pick too much, but the Kwakuitl live around the north end of Vancouver Island. Snow is rare around there unless you are willing to hike to 4000ft elevation or more, but trees are the most abundant resource. They didn't live in huts, but rather large wood longhouses in big villages. They paddled big cedar canoes. Now they live in wood framed houses and drive cars and motorboats like the rest of us.
On topic - I'm firmly in the camp that what should matter is our own selfish interest as humans. I also think that what is most interesting and valuable to us as a species is the natural genetic heritage of plants and animals on this planet we control. Nothing we have yet built has come close to the complexity of the natural world that surrounds us, but just when we are starting to build machines and theories with the power to decode it's genetic heritage, we are busy hacking off great chunks of it forever.
boostjuice
10 kW
wineboyrider said:
In the context of 'climategate', with full sarcasm intended -
"Yet when it comes to coverage of global warming, we are trapped in the logic of a guerrilla insurgency. The climate scientists have to be right 100 percent of the time, or their 0.01 percent error becomes Glaciergate, and they are frauds. By contrast, the deniers only have to be right 0.01 percent of the time for their narrative--See! The global warming story is falling apart!--to be reinforced by the media. It doesn't matter that their alternative theories are based on demonstrably false claims, as they are with all the leading "thinkers" in this movement.[1] â€
—Johann Hari
boostjuice
10 kW
Some other interesting articles also by John Gibbons;
Could climate change be linked to freak weather? Never!
2084: An Oral History of the Great Warming
Fukushima a godsend for anti-nuclear bandwagon
Could climate change be linked to freak weather? Never!
2084: An Oral History of the Great Warming
Fukushima a godsend for anti-nuclear bandwagon
MikeFairbanks
100 kW
We definitely have an overpopulation problem, but the solutions are not going to be pretty.
The world will get a lot more violent, or disease and starvation will even it out. It's tough to say.
If I didn't have kids I'd be a lot less worried about it. I say, "well, hopefully humans will either slow down their reproduction rate or find some amazing technologies for sustaining 7-10 billion people (it should reach 10 billion by about the year 2060).
We Americans are actually in pretty good shape. I've researched this a lot, and what I learned about agriculture is interesting.
For example:
1. A person who eats a vegetarian diet needs about .75 acres of farmland to be sustained. If we round that, then we say that you need about one acre per person per year.
2. The United States has about 7 acres of farm-able land per human being in our nation. So we're safe, right?
3. Not so quick. A. Most of us are omnivores. Secondly, we eat a lot of processed and packaged foods. Thirdly, we eat too much (I know I'm as guilty as the next guy--I need to lose about 20-25lbs).
4. When the dust settles and the math is in, it's a simple fact that Americans, on average, eat 10 acres per year. That's pretty bad.
You might be thinking, "wait a minute. How is it possible for Americans to eat, on average, 10 acres per year when there's only 7 acres per person?
Imports.
Just like oil, Americans are importing more and more food each year. Right now most of our food is produced domestically (like oil was back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s). But like oil, we want more and more food, so we import.
-------------------------
Now, let's look at China. The Chinese actually have about .75 acres per person. They hit their limit. Of course, some people eat more than others, and some eat meat (which uses a LOT of land). That's why in China people have traditionally (in some areas) struggled with famine. There simply isn't enough land to grow the crops needed to feed all those people. BTW: They import food too.
------------------------
Let's look at the opposite: New Zealand. They are in a unique position as they have 20 acres of farmable land for each citizen. That's amazing. New Zealand is roughly the size of California, but with about 10% of California's population. New Zealand has a lot of good farmland. So they are in great shape and won't starve anytime soon.
Unfortunately for them, they don't have much oil, so they grow a ton of sheep on their land and use that resource to trade for oil. They'll have to figure out something someday in terms of energy, because oil will become more and more expensive. How many sheep or how much wool is needed to gain a barrel of oil?
--------------------
The solution to the planet's problem is one that will most likely never be done: sterilization.
It's humane, but goes against the beliefs of many. I don't even know how I feel about it. I'm Christian, and follow the teachings of the Bible, but am often unclear on whether sterilization is right or wrong.
But if done by lottery, on a world-wide level, it would definitely work. If some children were randomly sterilized before hitting reproductive age it would certainly solve the problem of overpopulation, which would solve the symptoms as well (pollution, starvation, disease, etc.).
But it'll never happen.
Unfortunately, nature will work it out, and we might not like the results.
The world will get a lot more violent, or disease and starvation will even it out. It's tough to say.
If I didn't have kids I'd be a lot less worried about it. I say, "well, hopefully humans will either slow down their reproduction rate or find some amazing technologies for sustaining 7-10 billion people (it should reach 10 billion by about the year 2060).
We Americans are actually in pretty good shape. I've researched this a lot, and what I learned about agriculture is interesting.
For example:
1. A person who eats a vegetarian diet needs about .75 acres of farmland to be sustained. If we round that, then we say that you need about one acre per person per year.
2. The United States has about 7 acres of farm-able land per human being in our nation. So we're safe, right?
3. Not so quick. A. Most of us are omnivores. Secondly, we eat a lot of processed and packaged foods. Thirdly, we eat too much (I know I'm as guilty as the next guy--I need to lose about 20-25lbs).
4. When the dust settles and the math is in, it's a simple fact that Americans, on average, eat 10 acres per year. That's pretty bad.
You might be thinking, "wait a minute. How is it possible for Americans to eat, on average, 10 acres per year when there's only 7 acres per person?
Imports.
Just like oil, Americans are importing more and more food each year. Right now most of our food is produced domestically (like oil was back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s). But like oil, we want more and more food, so we import.
-------------------------
Now, let's look at China. The Chinese actually have about .75 acres per person. They hit their limit. Of course, some people eat more than others, and some eat meat (which uses a LOT of land). That's why in China people have traditionally (in some areas) struggled with famine. There simply isn't enough land to grow the crops needed to feed all those people. BTW: They import food too.
------------------------
Let's look at the opposite: New Zealand. They are in a unique position as they have 20 acres of farmable land for each citizen. That's amazing. New Zealand is roughly the size of California, but with about 10% of California's population. New Zealand has a lot of good farmland. So they are in great shape and won't starve anytime soon.
Unfortunately for them, they don't have much oil, so they grow a ton of sheep on their land and use that resource to trade for oil. They'll have to figure out something someday in terms of energy, because oil will become more and more expensive. How many sheep or how much wool is needed to gain a barrel of oil?
--------------------
The solution to the planet's problem is one that will most likely never be done: sterilization.
It's humane, but goes against the beliefs of many. I don't even know how I feel about it. I'm Christian, and follow the teachings of the Bible, but am often unclear on whether sterilization is right or wrong.
But if done by lottery, on a world-wide level, it would definitely work. If some children were randomly sterilized before hitting reproductive age it would certainly solve the problem of overpopulation, which would solve the symptoms as well (pollution, starvation, disease, etc.).
But it'll never happen.
Unfortunately, nature will work it out, and we might not like the results.
